Times film critic on the state of the (movie) art

By Joe Meyers

Published 3:16 pm, Tuesday, January 21, 2014

Movies can be watched now on TVs, computers, iPads, Kindles and even iPhones, but New York Times critic A. O. Scott believes there is still nothing like seeing a film in a theater with an audience.

In his view, we are in the middle of a period when gifted filmmakers have been using every foot of giant screens in such smart spectacles as "Gravity" and "All is Lost."

The film critic will be at the Regina A. Quick Center in Fairfield on Monday, Jan. 27, to talk about "the state of the movies now," and you can expect a big thumbs up for 2013.

"It was a very strong year," Scott said in a recent phone interview. "So we'll have a lot to talk about ... and of course we're in the thick of the Oscar race.

"As in every other part of the media, the movie business is in a period of enormous change and upheaval, with different ways of making movies, so I want to talk about the role of a critic in all of that.

"Audiences, viewers and consumers have so much to sort through now," he said of the stiff competition movies face from a plethora of home entertainment options that didn't exist 10 years ago.

"I'd like to talk about the state of the conversation between critics and moviegoers. I plan to explain myself a little bit," Scott said of the new ways that the Internet and social media are connecting critics and their audiences.

Scott laughed when I mentioned the recent film industry flap over the use of one of his tweets in a print ad for "Inside Llewyn Davis."

"That is one of the sillier things I've been involved in," he said of the producers using a single edited tweet about the film's soundtrack as the only text in the center of a big, white, full-page ad.

"It never occurred to me that they would use that. ... I guess it was rather naive to think that something you put on Twitter would not be used that way," the critic said.

Scott has been writing about movies for the Times since 2000 -- under his initials, rather than Anthony Oliver -- and he still loves his job.

"No one is sympathetic when you complain about seeing all of the bad movies -- except for a few colleagues -- but in general it is a lot of fun. You can hit a stretch of bad movies, but then there's always something interesting that comes along. I don't know how many movies I've seen in 14 years -- I've lost count -- but I still find stuff that is new and exciting. You catch sight of a new talent," he said.

Although doom-and-gloomers have been forecasting the end of theatrical moviegoing in favor of home viewing, Scott thinks there is still nothing like seeing a good movie in a theater, with a responsive audience.

"That's still very important to me," he said of the theater experience. "Obviously there are a great many other ways to see movies that are a lot more accessible now -- video on demand, streaming, various forms of (home entertainment) distribution -- but the aesthetic experience and communal experience (of moviegoing) is irreplaceable.

"You're in a dark space, sharing a collective dream. You can't get that from an iPad."

The critic believes that even the outstanding recent films that are not scaled as spectacles benefit from being seen with an audience.

"`12 Years a Slave' is part of our history and our society. Seeing and feeling it together makes it more powerful," he said.

When asked how much time he spends pondering the Oscar race, Scott said, "I take it a little more seriously than I used to. Not as a judge of quality, but it is extremely interesting as a way of seeing how the film industry views itself. You always have to remember that (the Academy) is a trade organization. It's an industry show with the actors, producers and directors judging themselves."